2024 (10) TMI 1246 - AT - Income Tax

Rejection of application for grant of regular 80G as time barred - Need to file regular 80G registration within a period of six months therefrom provisional registration granted - HELD THAT - As reading from para 7 of impugned order it as an undisputed fact that the appellant assessee was granted a provisional registration u/c (iv) of s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act by an order u/c (vi) of s/s (5) of section 80G of the Act by the CIT(E) on 16/02/2022. Therefore there remains no reason to draw out appellant s case from claiming benefit of extended period for filing application for regular registration. The circular 08/2023 also clarified that the extended period upto 30/09/2023 shall apply even in cases (i) where the application was rejected by the CIT(E) on or before issuance of this circular dated 24/05/2023 (ii) where due date for making/filing application has expired on or before 30/09/2023. We find in similar facts circumstance in Shashvat Paediatric Care Foundation 2024 (3) TMI 1365 - ITAT PUNE Swachh Vapi Mission Trust 2024 (3) TMI 614 - ITAT SURAT TB Lulla Charitable Foundation 2024 (6) TMI 798 - ITAT PUNE and Gujarat Hira Bourse 2024 (1) TMI 946 - ITAT SURAT and Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga Charitable Trust 2023 (11) TMI 1210 - ITAT JODHPUR Rejection of appellant s application on the ground of limitation in our considered view is without appreciating the facts in its entirety and devoid of subsisting circular (supra) hence deserves to be set-aside ergo ordered accordingly. Non-compliance of notice seeking rectification of discrepancies and submission of copy of certificate granted u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act - As we note that such notices were sent to email [email protected] belonging to a tax consultant who failed to intimate the same to the assessee for due compliance. Thus the said non-compliance by the assessee was purely accidental undeliberate which better can be complied only if the matter is restored back. In view hereof without commenting on merits we remand the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to treat appellant s application dt. 30/09/2023 as filed within the time limit prescribed u/c (iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act r.w.c. 06/2023 (supra) and adjudicate the same on merits in accordance with law after according two effective opportunities.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of application for grant of regular 80G certificate by Ld. CIT(E) for non-compliance.
2. Applicability of circular 08/2023 in cases of provisional approval under section 80G(5)(iv) of the Income-tax Act.
3. Non-compliance with notice seeking rectification of discrepancies and submission of required documents.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant contested the rejection of the application for a regular 80G certificate by the Ld. CIT(E) due to non-compliance. The rejection was based on grounds such as non-compliance with a notice requiring rectification, failure to produce necessary registration certificates, and the application being time-barred. The appellant filed the application after the stipulated period, leading to its rejection by the Revenue. The rejection was challenged on multiple grounds in the appeal, primarily focusing on the refusal to grant regular 80G registration.

Issue 2:
The circular 08/2023 was a crucial point of contention regarding the time limit for filing applications for regular registration under section 80G(5) of the Act. The circular extended the time limit for filing applications due to genuine hardships faced by stakeholders. The appellant, having been granted provisional registration under section 80G(5)(iv), was entitled to the extended time period as per the circular. The Tribunal examined the applicability of the circular in cases of provisional approval and emphasized the importance of adhering to the extended timelines provided by such circulars.

Issue 3:
Regarding the non-compliance with the notice seeking rectification of discrepancies and submission of required documents, the Tribunal noted that the notices were sent to a tax consultant's email, which failed to inform the appellant for compliance. The non-compliance was deemed accidental and unintentional. The Tribunal ordered the matter to be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(E) for reconsideration, directing the treatment of the appellant's application as filed within the prescribed time limit. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a fair adjudication of the matter after providing the appellant with adequate opportunities.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the rejection of the application for regular 80G registration due to the limitation issue and directing a reconsideration of the matter based on the merits and compliance with the circular provisions.